Screening Plagiarism — Statement & Policy

1) Statement and Policy

MEMOIR&C is committed to the highest standards of academic integrity. Plagiarism, excessive similarity, and improper paraphrasing undermine originality and trust. The journal enforces a strict screening policy to safeguard authenticity and credibility across all published content.

2) Similarity Assessment

The journal uses advanced similarity-detection software to compare submissions against published and web content. Authors are advised to target a similarity index < 25%. Submissions above this threshold are subject to editorial scrutiny.

3) Plagiarism, Similarity, and Improper Paraphrasing

Plagiarism includes, but is not limited to:

1. Copying verbatim text without quotation marks and proper citation.
2. Paraphrasing ideas or text without appropriate attribution.
3. Using figures, tables, or images without permission and/or citation.
4. Submitting previously published work as original (including in another language) without disclosure.
5. Self-plagiarism/redundant publication without clear citation to the original source.

All such practices constitute serious ethical breaches and may trigger editorial actions.

4) Similarity Thresholds — What Happens Next

• Similarity > 40% — Reject (No Resubmission): Indicates substantial overlap. The manuscript is rejected and no resubmission is accepted.
• Similarity 26–40% — Return for Improvement: Indicates moderate overlap. Authors may be invited to revise with correct citations and genuinely improved paraphrasing. Failure to adequately address concerns may lead to rejection.
• Similarity < 25% — Proceed/Minor Corrections: Indicates limited overlap. Manuscript may proceed to review; minor citation or wording improvements may be requested.

5) Author Responsibilities

• Ensure all text, figures, tables, and ideas are original or properly attributed.
• Use quotation marks and citations for verbatim text; keep direct quotations minimal and purposeful.
• Paraphrase meaningfully (not merely changing words) and cite the source.
• Obtain permission for third-party figures/tables; state permissions in captions or acknowledgements.
• Retain drafts/notes and be prepared to supply sources or raw text upon request.

6) When Screening Occurs

1. Pre-review screening: Initial check prior to external review; manuscripts with excessive overlap may be returned or rejected.
2. During review: Additional checks may be performed if concerns arise.
3. Pre-acceptance verification: Final check to confirm that revisions resolved overlap appropriately.
4. Post-publication: Substantiated concerns may trigger investigation and corrective notices.

7) Outcomes, Sanctions, and Appeals

• Outcomes: Technical revision, rejection, or—if already published—correction, expression of concern, or retraction.
• Sanctions: In cases of misconduct, the journal may notify institutions/funders or impose submission bans.
• Appeals: Authors may submit a reasoned appeal with evidence (e.g., permissions, annotated report). Appeals are reviewed impartially by the editorial team.

8) Additional Information

• Properly cite all external sources, including publications, datasets, software, and ideas.
• The journal may screen at any stage of peer review.
• Minor overlap may require revision and improved attribution before further consideration.
• The journal’s assessment focuses on substantive overlap in novel contributions, not on references lists or unavoidable boilerplate.

By adhering to this policy, authors help sustain a credible and ethical scholarly record—especially vital for research and community-focused work.